Thomas v. Helms

Fourth Circuit

Thomas v. Helms

305 F. App'x 57

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedDecember 11, 2008

DocketNo. 08-1764

StatusPublished

This text of 305 F. App'x 57 (Thomas v. Helms) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Thomas v. Helms, 305 F. App'x 57 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Randy L. Thomas appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion filed in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Thomas v. Helms, Mulliss, Wicker PLLC, No. 3:07-cv-00052-GCM, 2008 WL 2512900 (W.D.N.C. June 19, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Randy L. Thomas appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion filed in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Thomas v. Helms, Mulliss, Wicker PLLC, No. 3:07-cv-00052-GCM, 2008 WL 2512900 (W.D.N.C. June 19, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 F. App'x 57, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-helms-ca4-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack